OBJECTIVES: Retrospective ECG-gated multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT) is increasingly used for the assessment of prosthetic heart valve (PHV) dysfunction, but is also hampered by PHV-related artefacts/cardiac arrhythmias. Furthermore, it is performed without nitroglycerine or heart rate correction. The purpose was to determine whether MDCT performed before potential redo-PHV surgery is feasible for concomitant coronary artery stenosis assessment and can replace invasive coronary angiography (CAG). METHODS: PHV patients with CAG and MDCT were identified. Based on medical history, two groups were created: (I) patients with no known coronary artery disease (CAD), (II) patients with known CAD. All images were scored for the presence of significant (>50 %) stenosis. CAG was the reference test. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were included. In group I (n = 38), MDCT accurately ruled out significant stenosis in 19/38 (50 %) patients, but could not replace CAG in the remaining 19/38 (50 %) patients due to non-diagnostic image quality (n = 16) or significant stenosis (n = 3) detection. In group II (n = 13), MDCT correctly found no patients without significant stenosis, requiring CAG imaging in all. MDCT assessed patency in 16/19 (84 %) grafts and detected a hostile anatomy in two. CONCLUSION: MDCT performed for PHV dysfunction assessment can replace CAG (100 % accurate) in approximately half of patients without previously known CAD. KEY POINTS: • Retrospective MDCT is increasingly used for prosthetic heart valve dysfunction assessment • In case of PHV reoperation, invasive coronary angiography is also required • MDCT can replace CAG in 50 % of patients without coronary artery disease • When conclusive for coronary assessment, MDCT stenosis rule out is highly accurate • Replacing CAG saves associated risks of distant embolization of thrombi or vegetations.
OBJECTIVES: Retrospective ECG-gated multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT) is increasingly used for the assessment of prosthetic heart valve (PHV) dysfunction, but is also hampered by PHV-related artefacts/cardiac arrhythmias. Furthermore, it is performed without nitroglycerine or heart rate correction. The purpose was to determine whether MDCT performed before potential redo-PHV surgery is feasible for concomitant coronary artery stenosis assessment and can replace invasive coronary angiography (CAG). METHODS: PHV patients with CAG and MDCT were identified. Based on medical history, two groups were created: (I) patients with no known coronary artery disease (CAD), (II) patients with known CAD. All images were scored for the presence of significant (>50 %) stenosis. CAG was the reference test. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were included. In group I (n = 38), MDCT accurately ruled out significant stenosis in 19/38 (50 %) patients, but could not replace CAG in the remaining 19/38 (50 %) patients due to non-diagnostic image quality (n = 16) or significant stenosis (n = 3) detection. In group II (n = 13), MDCT correctly found no patients without significant stenosis, requiring CAG imaging in all. MDCT assessed patency in 16/19 (84 %) grafts and detected a hostile anatomy in two. CONCLUSION: MDCT performed for PHV dysfunction assessment can replace CAG (100 % accurate) in approximately half of patients without previously known CAD. KEY POINTS: • Retrospective MDCT is increasingly used for prosthetic heart valve dysfunction assessment • In case of PHV reoperation, invasive coronary angiography is also required • MDCT can replace CAG in 50 % of patients without coronary artery disease • When conclusive for coronary assessment, MDCT stenosis rule out is highly accurate • Replacing CAG saves associated risks of distant embolization of thrombi or vegetations.
Authors: Willem B Meijboom; Nico R Mollet; Carlos A G Van Mieghem; Jolanda Kluin; Annick C Weustink; Francesca Pugliese; Eleni Vourvouri; Filippo Cademartiri; Ad J J C Bogers; Gabriel P Krestin; Pim J de Feyter Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-09-26 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Gudrun M Feuchtner; Paul Stolzmann; Wolfgang Dichtl; Thomas Schertler; Johannes Bonatti; Hans Scheffel; Silvana Mueller; André Plass; Ludwig Mueller; Thomas Bartel; Florian Wolf; Hatem Alkadhi Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2009-02-03 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Annick C Weustink; Koen Nieman; Fransesca Pugliese; Nico R Mollet; W Bob Meijboom; Bob W Meijboom; Carlos van Mieghem; Gert-Jan ten Kate; Filippo Cademartiri; Gabriel P Krestin; Pim J de Feyter Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2009-07
Authors: W Bob Meijboom; Matthijs F L Meijs; Joanne D Schuijf; Maarten J Cramer; Nico R Mollet; Carlos A G van Mieghem; Koen Nieman; Jacob M van Werkhoven; Gabija Pundziute; Annick C Weustink; Alexander M de Vos; Francesca Pugliese; Benno Rensing; J Wouter Jukema; Jeroen J Bax; Mathias Prokop; Pieter A Doevendans; Myriam G M Hunink; Gabriel P Krestin; Pim J de Feyter Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2008-12-16 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jesse Habets; Renee B A van den Brink; Ruben Uijlings; Anje M Spijkerboer; Willem P Th M Mali; Steven A J Chamuleau; Ricardo P J Budde Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-12-23 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Petr Symersky; Jesse Habets; Paul Westers; Bas A J M de Mol; Mathias Prokop; Ricardo P J Budde Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-12-30 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Wiebe G Knol; Ali R Wahadat; Jolien W Roos-Hesselink; Nicolas M Van Mieghem; Wilco Tanis; Ad J J C Bogers; Ricardo P J Budde Journal: Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg Date: 2021-04-19
Authors: Dominika Suchá; Steven A J Chamuleau; Petr Symersky; Matthijs F L Meijs; Renee B A van den Brink; Bas A J M de Mol; Willem P Th M Mali; Jesse Habets; Lex A van Herwerden; Ricardo P J Budde Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-10-16 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: W Tanis; R P J Budde; I A C van der Bilt; B Delemarre; G Hoohenkerk; J-K van Rooden; A M Scholtens; J Habets; S Chamuleau Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 2.380